CHAPTER I

CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN NOVELISTS

1900-1920

BY

CARL VAN DOREN

1922

To

FREDA KIRCHWEY

PREFACE

_The American Novel_, published last year, undertook to trace the

progress of a literary type in the United States from its beginnings to

the end of the nineteenth century; _Contemporary American Novelists_

undertakes to study the type as it has existed during the first two

decades of the twentieth century. Readers of both volumes may note that

in this later volume criticism has tended to supplant history. Only in

writing of dead authors can the critic feel that any considerable

portion of his task is done when he has arranged them in what he thinks

their proper categories and their true perspective. In the case of

living authors he has regularly to remember that he works with shifting

materials, with figures whose dimensions and importance may be changed

by growth, with persons who may desert old paths for new, reveal

unsuspected attributes, increase or fade with the mere revolutions of

time. All he can expect to do in dealing with any current type as fluid

as the novel, is, seizing upon it at some specific moment, to examine

the intentions and successes of outstanding or typical individuals and

to make the most accurate report possible concerning them. Whatever

general tendency there may be ought to appear from his examination.

The general tendency appearing most clearly among the novelists here

studied is, of course, the drift of naturalism: initiated a full

generation ago by several restless spirits, of whom E.W. Howe and Hamlin

Garland are the most conspicuous survivors; continued by those young

geniuses Stephen Crane, Frank Norris, Jack London, all dead before their

time, and by Theodore Dreiser, Robert Herrick, Upton Sinclair, happily

still alive; given a fresh impulse during the shaken years of the war

and of the recovery from war by such satirists as Edgar Lee Masters and

Sinclair Lewis and their companions in the new revolt. The intelligent

American fiction of the century has to be studied--so far as the novel

is concerned--largely in terms of its agreement or its disagreement with

this naturalistic tendency, which has been powerful enough to draw

Winston Churchill and Booth Tarkington into an approach to its

practices, to drive James Branch Cabell and Joseph Hergesheimer into

explicit dissent, and to throw into strong relief the balanced

independence of Edith Wharton and Willa Cather. The year 1920, marking a

peak in the triumph of one or two species of naturalism and in some ways

closing a chapter, affords an admirable occasion to take stock. This

book, indeed, was planned and begun at the close of that year and has

firmly resisted the temptation to do more than glance at most of the

work produced since then--even at the price of giving what must seem

insufficient notice to _The Triumph of the Egg_ and _Three Soldiers_

and of giving none at all to that still more recent masterpiece

_Cytherea_. While criticism pauses to take stock, creation steadily goes

on.

Acknowledgments are due _The Nation_ for permission to reprint from its

pages those portions of the volume which have already been published

there.

CARL VAN DOREN.

March, 1922.

CONTENTS

I OLD STYLE

1. Local Color

2. Romance

II ARGUMENT

1. Hamlin Garland

2. Winston Churchill

3. Robert Herrick

4. Upton Sinclair

5. Theodore Dreiser

III ART

1. Booth Tarkington

2. Edith Wharton

3. James Branch Cabell

4. Willa Cather

5. Joseph Hergesheimer

IV NEW STYLE

1. Emergent Types

_Ellen Glasgow, William Allen White, Ernest Poole, Henry B. Fuller, Mary

Austin, Immigrants._

2. The Revolt from the Village

_Edgar Lee Masters, Sherwood Anderson, E.W. Howe, Sinclair Lewis, Zona

Gale, Floyd Dell, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Dorothy Canfield, 1921._

CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN NOVELISTS

CHAPTER I

OLD STYLE

1. LOCAL COLOR

A study of the American novel of the twentieth century must first of all

take stock of certain types of fiction which continue to persist, with

varying degrees of vitality and significance, from the last quarter of

the century preceding.

There is, to begin with, the type associated with the now moribund cult

of local color, which originally had Bret Harte for its prophet, and

which, beginning almost at once after the Civil War, gradually broadened

out until it saw priests in every state and followers in every county.

Obedient to the example of the prophet, most of the practitioners of the

mode chose to be episodic rather than epic in their undertakings; the

history of local color belongs primarily to the historian of the short

story. Even when the local colorists essayed the novel they commonly did

little more than to expand some episode into elaborate dimensions or to

string beads of episode upon an obvious thread. Hardly one of them ever

made any real advance, either in art or reputation, upon his earliest

important volume: George Washington Cable, after more than forty years,

is still on the whole best represented by his _Old Creole Days_; and

so--to name only the chief among the survivors--after intervals not

greatly shorter are Mary N. Murfree ("Charles Egbert Craddock") by _In

the Tennessee Mountains_, Thomas Nelson Page by _In Ole Virginia_, Mary

E. Wilkins Freeman by _A Humble Romance and Other Stories_, James Lane

Allen by _Flute and Violin_, and Alice Brown by _Meadow-Grass_.

The eager popular demand for these brevities does not entirely account

for the failure of the type to go beyond its first experimental stage.

The defects of local color inhere in the constitution of the cult

itself, which, as its name suggests, thought first of color and then of

form, first of the piquant surfaces and then--if at all--of the stubborn

deeps of human life. In a sense, the local colorists were all pioneers:

they explored the older communities as solicitously as they did the new,

but they most of them came earliest in some field or other and found--or

thought--it necessary to clear the top of the soil before they sank

shaft or spade into it. Moreover, they accepted almost without challenge

the current inhibitions of gentility, reticence, cheerfulness. They

confined themselves to the emotions and the ideas and the language, for

the most part, of the respectable; they disregarded the stormier or

stealthier behavior of mankind or veiled it with discreet periphrasis;

they sweetened their narratives wherever possible with a brimming

optimism nicely tinctured with amiable sentiments. Poetic justice

prospered and happy endings were orthodox. To a remarkable extent the

local colorists passed by the immediate problems of Americans--social,

theological, political, economic; nor did they frequently rise above the

local to the universal. They were, in short, ordinarily provincial,

without, however, the rude durability or the homely truthfulness of

provincialism at its best.

To reflect upon the achievements of this dwindling cult is to discover

that it invented few memorable plots, devised almost no new styles,

created little that was genuinely original in its modes of truth or

beauty, and even added but the scantiest handful of characters to the

great gallery of the imagination. What local color did was to fit

obliging fiction to resisting fact in so many native regions that the

entire country came in some degree to see itself through literary eyes

and therefore in some degree to feel civilized by the sight. This is,

indeed, one of the important processes of civilization. But in this case

it was limited in its influence by the habits of vision which the local

colorists had. They scrutinized their world at the instigation of

benevolence rather than at that of intelligence; they felt it with

friendship rather than with passion. And because of their limitations of

intelligence and passion they fell naturally into routine ways and both

saw and represented in accordance with this or that prevailing formula.

Herein they were powerfully confirmed by the pressure of editors and a

public who wanted each writer to continue in the channel of his happiest

success and not to disappoint them by new departures. Not only did this

result in confining individuals to a single channel each but it resulted

in the convergence of all of them into a few broad and shallow streams.

An excellent example may be found in the flourishing cycle of stories

which, while Bret Harte was celebrating California, grew up about the

life of Southern plantations before the war. The mood of most of these

was of course elegiac and the motive was to show how much splendor had

perished in the downfall of the old régime. Over and over they repeated

the same themes: how an irascible planter refuses to allow his daughter

to marry the youth of her choice and how true love finds a way; how a

beguiling Southern maiden has to choose between lovers and gives her

hand and heart to him who is stoutest in his adherence to the

Confederacy; how, now and then, love crosses the lines and a Confederate

girl magnanimously, though only after a desperate struggle with herself,

marries a Union officer who has saved the old plantation from a

marauding band of Union soldiers; how a pair of ancient slaves cling to

their duty during the appalling years and will not presume upon their

freedom even when it comes; how the gentry, though menaced by a riffraff

of poor whites, nevertheless hold their heads high and shine brightly

through the gloom; how some former planter and everlasting colonel

declines to be reconstructed by events and passes the remainder of his

years as a courageous, bibulous, orgulous simulacrum of his once

thriving self. Mr. Page's _In Ole Virginia_ and F. Hopkinson Smith's

_Colonel Carter of Cartersville_ in a brief compass employ all these

themes; and dozens of books which might be named play variations upon

them without really enlarging or correcting them. All of them were

kindly, humorous, sentimental, charming; almost all of them are steadily

fading out like family photographs.

The South, however, did not restrict itself wholly to its plantation

cycle. In New Orleans Mr. Cable daintily worked the lode which had been

deposited there by a French and Spanish past and by the presence still

of Creole elements in the population. Yet he too was elegiac,

sentimental, pretty, even when his style was most deft and his

representations most engaging. Quaintness was his second nature; romance

was in his blood. Bras-Coupé, the great, proud, rebellious slave in _The

Grandissimes_, belongs to the ancient lineage of those African princes

who in many tales have been sold to chain and lash and have escaped from

them by dying. The postures and graces and contrivances of Mr. Cable's

Creoles are traditional to all the little aristocracies surviving, in

fiction, from some more substantial day. Yet in spite of these

conventions his better novels have a texture of genuine vividness and

beauty. In their portrayal of the manners of New Orleans they have many

points of quiet satire and censure that betray a critical intelligence

working seriously behind them. That critical disposition in Mr. Cable

led him to disagree with the majority of Southerners regarding the

justice due the Negroes; and it helped persuade him to spend the

remainder of his life in a distant region.

The incident is symptomatic. While slavery still existed, public opinion

in the South had demanded that literature should exhibit the institution

only under a rosy light; public opinion now demanded that the problem in

its new guise should still be glossed over in the old way. In neither

era, consequently, could an honest novelist freely follow his

observations upon Southern life in general. The mind of the herd bore

down upon him and crushed him into the accepted molds. It seems a

curious irony that the Negroes who thus innocently limited the

literature of their section should have been the subjects of a little

body of narrative which bids fair to outlast all that local color hit

upon in the South. Joel Chandler Harris is not, strictly speaking, a

contemporary, but Uncle Remus is contemporary and perennial. His stories

are grounded in the universal traits of simple souls; they are also the

whimsical, incidental mirror of a particular race during a

significant--though now extinct--phase of its career. They are at once

as ancient and as fresh as folk-lore.

Besides the rich planters and their slaves one other class of human

beings in the South especially attracted the attention of the local

colorists--the mountaineers. Certain distant cousins of this backwoods

stock had come into literature as "Pikes" or poor whites in the Far

West with Bret Harte and in the Middle West with John Hay and Edward

Eggleston; it remained for Charles Egbert Craddock in Tennessee and John

Fox in Kentucky to discover the heroic and sentimental qualities of the

breed among its highland fastnesses of the Great Smoky and Cumberland

Mountains. Here again formulas sprang up and so stifled the free growth

of observation that, though a multitude of stories has been written

about the mountains, almost all of them may be resolved into themes as

few in number as those which succeeded nearer Tidewater: how a stranger

man comes into the mountains, loves the flower of all the native

maidens, and clashes with the suspicions or jealousies of her

neighborhood; how two clans have been worn away by a long vendetta until

only one representative of each clan remains and the two forgive and

forget among the ruins; how a band of highlanders defend themselves

against the invading minions of a law made for the nation at large but

hardly applicable to highland circumstances; how the mountain virtues in

some way or other prove superior to the softer virtues--almost vices by

comparison--of the world of plains and cities. These formulas, however,

resulted from another cause than the popular complacency which hated to

be disturbed in Virginia and Louisiana. The mountain people,

inarticulate themselves, have uniformly been seen from the outside and

therefore have been studied in their surface peculiarities more often

than in their deeper traits of character. And, having once entered the

realm of legend, they continue to be known by the half-dozen

distinguishing features which in legend are always enough for any type.

In the North and West, of course, much the same process went on as in

the South among the local colorists, conditioned by the same demands and

pressures. Because the territory was wider, however, in the expanding

sections, the types of character there were somewhat less likely to be

confined to one locality than in the section which for a time had a ring

drawn round it by its past and by the difficulty of emerging from it;

and because the career of North and West was not definitely interrupted

by the war, the types of fiction there have persisted longer than in the

South, where a new order of life, after a generation of clinging

memories, has moved toward popular heroes of a new variety.

The cowboy, for instance, legitimate successor to the miners and

gamblers of Bret Harte, might derive from almost any one of the states

and might range over prodigious areas; it is partly accident, of course,

that he stands out so sharply among the numerous conditions of men

produced by the new frontier. Except on very few occasions, as in Alfred

Henry Lewis's racy Wolfville stories and in Frederick Remington's vivid

pictures, in Andy Adams's more minute chronicle _The Log of a Cowboy_,

in Owen Wister's more sentimental _The Virginian_, and in O. Henry's

more diversified _Heart of the West_ and its fellows among his books,

the cowboy has regularly moved on the plane of the sub-literary--in dime

novels and, latterly, in moving pictures. He, like the mountaineer of

the South, has himself been largely inarticulate except for his rude

songs and ballads; formula and tradition caught him early and in

fiction stiffened one of the most picturesque of human beings--a modern

Centaur, an American Cossack, a Western picaro--into a stock figure who

in a stock costume perpetually sits a bucking broncho, brandishes a

six-shooter or swings a lariat, rounds up stampeding cattle, makes

fierce war on Mexicans, Indians, and rival outfits, and ardently, humbly

woos the ranchman's gentle daughter or the timorous school-ma'am. He

still has no Homer, no Gogol, no Fenimore Cooper even, though he invites

a master of some sort to take advantage of a thrilling opportunity.

The same fate of formula and tradition befell another type multiplied by

the local novelists--the bad boy. His career may be said to have begun

in New England, with Thomas Bailey Aldrich's reaction from the priggish

manikins who infested the older "juveniles"; but Mark Twain took him up

with such mastery that his subsequent habitat has usually been the

Middle West, where a recognized lineage connects Tom Sawyer and

Huckleberry Finn with Mitch Miller and Penrod Schofield and their

fellow-conspirators against the peace of villages. The bad boy, it must

be noticed, is never really bad; he is simply mischievous. He serves as

a natural outlet for the imagination of communities which are

respectable but which lack reverence for solemn dignity. He can play the

wildest pranks and still be innocent; he can have his adolescent fling

and then settle down into a prudent maturity. Both the influence of Mark

Twain and the local color tendency toward uniformity in type have held

the bad boy to a path which, in view of his character, seems singularly

narrow. In book after book he indulges in the same practical jokes upon

parents, teachers, and all those in authority; brags, fibs, fights,

plays truant, learns to swear and smoke, with the same devices and

consequences; suffers from the same agonies of shyness, the same

indifference to the female sex, the same awkward inclination toward

particular little girls. For the most part, thanks to the formulas, he

has been examined from the angle of adult irritation or amusement; only

very recently--as by Edgar Lee Masters and Sherwood Anderson--has he

been credited with a life and passions more or less his own and

therefore as fully rounded as his stage of development permits.

The American business man, with millions of imaginations daily turned

upon him, rarely appears in that fiction which sprang from local color

except as the canny trader of some small town or as the ruthless magnate

of some glittering metropolis. _David Harum_ remains his rural avatar

and _The Letters from a Self-Made Merchant to His Son_ his most popular

commentary. Doubtless the existence of this type in every community

tends to warn off the searchers after local figures, who have preferred,

in their fashion, to be monopolists when they could. Doubtless, also,

the American business man has suffered from the critical light in which

he has been studied by the reflective novelists. But though the higher

grades of literature have refused to pay unstinted tribute and honor to

men of wealth, the lower grades have paid almost as lavishly as life

itself.

Multitudes of poor boys in popular fiction rise to affluence by the

practice of the commercial virtues. To be self-made, the axiom tacitly

runs, is to be well-made. Time was in the United States when the true

hero had to start his career, unaided, from some lonely farm, from some

widow's cottage, or from some city slum; and although, with the growth

of luxury in the nation, readers have come to approve the heir who puts

on overalls and works up in a few months from the bottom of the factory

to the top, the standards of success are practically the same in all

instances: sleepless industry, restless scheming, resistless will,

coupled with a changeless probity in the domestic excellences. Nothing

is more curious about the American business man of fiction than the

sentimentality he displays in all matters of the heart. He may hold as

robustly as he likes to the doctrine that business is business and that

business and sympathy will not mix, but when put to the test he must

always soften under the pleadings of distress and be malleable to the

desires of mother, sweetheart, wife, or daughter. Even when a popular

novelist sets out to be reflective--say, for example, Winston

Churchill--he takes his hero up to the mountain of success and then

conducts him down again to the valley of humiliation, made conscious

that the love, after all, either of his family or of his society, is

better than lucre. Theodore Dreiser's stubborn habit of presenting his

rich men's will to power without abatement or apology has helped to keep

him steadily suspected. The popular romancers have contrived to mingle

passion for money and susceptibility to moralism somewhat upon the

analogy of those lucky thaumaturgists who are able to eat their cake and

have it too.

A similar mixture occurs in the politician of popular tradition. He

hardly ever rises to the dimensions of statesmanship, and indeed rarely

belongs to the Federal government at all: Washington has always been

singularly neglected by the novelists. The American politician of

fiction is essentially a local personage, the boss of ward or village.

Customarily he holds no office himself but instead sits in some dusty

den and dispenses injustice with an even hand. Candidates fear his

influence and either truckle to him or advance against him with the

weapons of reform--failing, as a rule, to accomplish anything. Aldermen

and legislators are his creatures. His web is out in all directions: he

holds this man's mortgage, knows that man's guilty secret, discovers the

other's weakness and takes advantage of it. He is cynically illiterate

and contemptuous of the respectable classes. If need be he can resort to

outrageous violence to gain his ends. And yet, though the reflective

novelists have all condemned him for half a century, he sits fast in

ordinary fiction, where he is tolerated with the amused fatalism which

in actual American life has allowed his lease to run so long. What

justifies him is his success--his countrymen love success for its own

sake--and his kind heart. Like Robin Hood he levies upon the plethoric

rich for the deserving poor; and he yields to the tender entreaties of

the widow and the orphan with amiable gestures.

The women characters evolved by the school of local color endure a

serious restriction from the excessive interest taken by the novelists

in the American young girl. Not only has she as a possible reader

established the boundaries beyond which they might not go in speaking of

sexual affairs but she has dominated the scene of their inventions with

her glittering energy and her healthy bloodlessness. Some differences

appear among the sections of the country as to what special phases of

her character shall be here or there preferred: she is ordinarily most

capricious in the Southern, most strenuous in the Western, most knowing

in the New York, and most demure in the New England novels. Yet

everywhere she considerably resembles a bright, cool, graceful boy

pretending to be a woman. Coeducation and the scarcity of chaperons have

made her self-possessed to a degree which mystifies readers not duly

versed in American folkways. Though she plays at love-making almost from

the cradle, she manages hardly ever to be scorched--a salamander, as one

novelist suggests, sporting among the flames of life.

When native Victorianism was at its height, in the third quarter of the

nineteenth century, she inclined to piety as her mode of preservation;

at the present moment she inclines to a romping optimism which frightens

away both thought and passion. From _The Wide, Wide World_ to

_Pollyanna_, however, she has taken habitual advantage of the reverence

for the virgin which is one of the most pervasive elements in American

popular opinion. That reverence has many charming and wholesome aspects;

it has given young women a priceless freedom of movement in America

without the penalty of being constantly suspected of sexual designs

which they may not harbor. It must be remembered that the Daisy Millers

who awaken unjust European gossip are understood at home, and that the

understanding given them is a form of homage certainly no less honorable

than the compliments of gallantry. In actual experience, however, girls

grow up, whereas the popular fiction of the United States has done its

best to keep them forever children. Nothing breaks the crystal shallows

of their confidence. They are insolently secure in a world apparently

made for them. The little difficulties which perturb their courtship are

nine-tenths of them superficial and external matters, and the end comes

as smoothly as a fairy tale's, before doubt has ever had an opportunity

to shatter or passion the occasion to purge a spirit. From Hawthorne to

the beginnings of naturalism there was hardly a single profound love

story written in America. How could there be when green girls were the

sole heroines and censors?

Among the older women created by the local color generation there were

certain fashionable successes and social climbers in the large cities

who have more complex fortunes than the young girls; but for the most

part they are merely typical or conventional--as selfish as gold and as

hard as agate. On somewhat humbler levels that generation--as Mary

Austin has pointed out of American fiction at large--came nearer to

reality by its representation of a type peculiar to the United States:

the "woman" who is also a "lady"; that is, who combines in herself the

functions both of the busy housewife and of the charming ornament of her

society. The gradual reduction in America of the servant class has

served to develop women who keep books and music beside them at their

domestic tasks as pioneer farmers kept muskets near them in the fields.

They devote to homely duties the time devoted by European ladies to

love, intrigue, public affairs; they preserve, thanks to countless

labor-saving devices, for more or less intellectual pursuits the

strength which among European women is consumed by habitual drudgery.

The combination of functions has probably done much to increase

sexlessness and to decrease helplessness, and so to produce almost a new

species of womanhood which is bound eventually to be of great moment in

the national life. Local color, however, taking the species for granted,

seems hardly to have been aware of its significant existence.

Only New England emphasized a distinct type: the old maid. She has been

studied in that section as in no other quarter of the world. Expansion

and emigration after the Civil War drew very heavily upon the declining

Puritan stock; and naturally the young men left their native farms and

villages more numerously than the young women, who remained behind and

in many cases never married. Local fiction fell very largely into the

hands of women--Harriet Beecher Stowe, Rose Terry Cooke, Sarah Orne

Jewett, Mary E. Wilkins Freeman, Alice Brown--who broke completely with

the age-old tradition of ridiculing spinsters no longer young. In the

little cycles which these story-tellers elaborated the old maid is

likely to be the center of her episode, studied in her own career and

not merely in that of households upon which she is some sort of

parasite. The heroine of Mrs. Freeman's _A New England Nun_ is an

illuminating instance: she has been betrothed to an absent,

fortune-hunting lover for fourteen years, and now that he is back she

finds herself full of consternation at his masculine habits and rejoices

when he turns to another woman and leaves his first love to the felicity

of her contented cell.

What in most literatures appears as a catastrophe appears in New

England as a relief. Energy has run low in the calm veins of such women,

and they have better things to do than to dwell upon the lives they

might have led had marriage complicated them. Here genre painting

reaches its apogee in American literature: quaint interiors scrupulously

described; rounds of minute activity familiarly portrayed; skimpy moods

analyzed with a delicate competence of touch. At the same time, New

England literature was now too sentimental and now too realistic to

allow all its old maids to remain perpetually sweet and passive. In its

sentimental hours it liked to call up their younger days and to show

them at the point which had decided or compelled their future

loneliness--again and again discovering some act of abnegation such as

giving up a lover because of the unsteadiness of his moral principles or

surrendering him to another woman to whom he seemed for some reason or

other to belong. In its realistic hours local color in New England liked

to examine the atrophy of the emotions which in these stories often

grows upon the celibate. One formula endlessly repeated deals with the

efforts of some acrid spinster--or wife long widowed--to keep a young

girl from marriage, generally out of contempt for love as a trivial

weakness; the conclusion usually makes love victorious after a

thunderbolt of revelation to the hinderer. There are inquiries, too,

into the repressions and obsessions of women whose lives in this fashion

or that have missed their flowering. Many of the inquiries are

sympathetic, tender, penetrating, but most of them incline toward

timidity and tameness. Their note is prevailingly the note of elegy;

they are seen through a trembling haze of reticence. It is as if they

had been made for readers of a vitality no more abundant than that of

their angular heroines.

It would be possible to make a picturesque, precious anthology of

stories dealing with the types and humors of New England. Different

writers would contribute different tones: Sarah Orne Jewett the tone of

faded gentility brooding over its miniature possessions in decaying

seaport towns or in idyllic villages a little further inland; Mary E.

Wilkins Freeman the tone of a stern honesty trained in isolated farms

and along high, exposed ridges where the wind seems to have gnarled the

dispositions of men and women as it has gnarled the apple trees and

where human stubbornness perpetually crops out through a covering of

kindliness as if in imitation of those granite ledges which everywhere

tend to break through the thin soil; Alice Brown the tone of a homely

accuracy touched with the fresh hues of a gently poetical temperament.

More detailed in actuality than the stories of other sections, these New

England plots do not fall so readily into formulas as do those of the

South and West; and yet they have their formulas: how a stubborn pride

worthy of some supreme cause holds an elderly Yankee to a petty,

obstinate course until grievous calamities ensue; how a rural wife,

neglected and overworked by her husband, rises in revolt against the

treadmill of her dull tasks and startles him into comprehension and

awkward consideration; how the remnant of some once prosperous family

puts into the labor of keeping up appearances an amount of effort which,

otherwise expended, might restore the family fortunes; how neighbors

lock horns in the ruthless litigation which in New England corresponds

to the vendettas of Kentucky and how they are reconciled eventually by

sentiment in one guise or another; how a young girl--there are no Tom

Joneses and few Hamlets in this womanly universe--grows up bright and

sensitive as a flower and suffers from the hard, stiff frame of pious

poverty; how a superb heroism springs out of a narrow life, expressing

itself in some act of pitiful surrender and veiling the deed under an

even more pitiful inarticulateness.

The cities of New England have been almost passed over by the local

colorists; Boston, the capital of the Puritans, has singularly to depend

upon the older Holmes or the visiting Howells of Ohio for its reputation

in fiction. Ever since Hawthorne, the romancers and novelists of his

native province have taken, one may say, to the fields, where they have

worked much in the mood of Rose Terry Cooke, who called her best

collection of stories _Huckleberries_ to emphasize what she thought a

true resemblance between the crops and characters of New

England--"hardy, sweet yet spicy, defying storms of heat or cold with

calm persistence, clinging to a poor soil, barren pastures, gray and

rocky hillsides, yet drawing fruitful issues from scanty sources."

Alas that as time goes on the issues of such art seem less fruitful than

once they seemed; that even Mrs. Freeman's _Pembroke_, one of the best

novels of its class, lacks form and structure, and seems to encroach

upon caricature in its study of the progress and consequences of Yankee

pride. After a fecund generation of such stories Edith Wharton in _Ethan

Frome_ has surpassed all her native rivals in tragic power and

distinction of language; Robert Frost has been able to distil the

essence of all of them in three slender books of verse; Edwin Arlington

Robinson in a few brief poems has created the wistful Tilbury Town and

has endowed it with pathos at once more haunting and more lasting than

that of any New England village chronicled in prose; it has remained for

the Pennsylvanian Joseph Hergesheimer in _Java Head_ to seize most

artfully upon the riches of loveliness that survive from the hour when

Massachusetts was at its noon of prosperity; and local color of the

orthodox tradition now persists in New England hardly anywhere except

around Cape Cod, of which Joseph C. Lincoln is the dry, quaint, amusing

laureate.

Through the influence, in important measure, of Howells and the

_Atlantic Monthly_ the modes of fiction which were practised east of

Albany extended their example to other districts also: to northern New

York in Irving Bacheller; to Ohio in Mary S. Watts and Brand Whitlock;

to Indiana in Meredith Nicholson; to Wisconsin in Zona Gale; to Iowa and

Arkansas in Alice French ("Octave Thanet"); to Kansas in William Allen

White; to the Colorado mines in Mary Hallock Foote; to the Virginias in

Ellen Glasgow and Henry Sydnor Harrison; to Georgia in Will N. Harben;

and to other neighborhoods in other neighborly chroniclers whose mere

names could stretch out to a point beyond which critical emphasis would

be lost. New York City clung to less tender and more incisive habits of

fiction; that city's pace for local color was set by the deft, bright

Richard Harding Davis, Henry Cuyler Bunner, Brander Matthews, O.

Henry--all well known figures; by the late Herman Knickerbocker Vielé,

too little known, in whose novels, such as _The Last of the

Knickerbockers_, affectionate accuracy is mated with smiling, graceful

humor; and by David Gray, too little known, whose _Gallops_, concerned

with the horsy parish of St. Thomas Equinus near New York City, contains

the most amusing stories about fashionable sports which this republic

has brought forth. In the Middle West Edgar Watson Howe and Hamlin

Garland, and in the Far West Frank Norris and Jack London, broke with

the customary tendency by turning away from pathos toward tragedy, and

away from discreet benevolence toward emphatic candor. The prevailing

school of naturalism has made its principal advance upon the passing

school of local color by a sacrifice of genial neighborliness; no less

exact and detailed in observation than their predecessors, the

naturalists have insisted upon bringing criticism in and measuring the

most amiable locality by wider standards. Here lies the essential point

of difference between the old style and the new.

It is by reference to this point that the credit--such as it is--of

being quite contemporary must be withheld from so earnest and varied a

novelist as Margaret Deland. That theological agonies like those in

_John Ward, Preacher_ were actually suffered a generation back and that

the book is a valuable document upon the times cannot explain away the

fact that Mrs. Deland herself appears to have been partly overwhelmed

by the storm which sweeps the parish of her story. So in her later

novels which have essayed such problems as divorce, the compulsions of

love, the inevitable clash of parents and children, she tugs at Gordian

knots with the patient fingers of goodwill when one slash with the

intelligence would cut her difficulties away. Suppose it possible, for

instance, that the heroine of _The Awakening of Helena Richie_ could

have been courageous enough to go to her lover to await the death of her

loathsome husband and then could have been so timid as to undergo the

perturbations over her conduct which almost break her heart in Old

Chester--suppose these contradictions might have dwelt together in

Helena, yet could Mrs. Deland not have noted and anatomized them in a

way to show that she saw the contradictions even while recording them?

Suppose that Elizabeth in _The Iron Woman_ was expected by her community

to pay superfluously for an hour's blind folly with a lifetime of

unhappiness and did undertake so to pay for it, yet could Mrs. Deland

not have pointed out that the situation was repugnant both to ordinary

common sense and to the very code of honor and stability which in the

end persuades David and Elizabeth to give each other up?

The conclusions of these novels, which to thousands of readers have

seemed stern and terrible, are in reality terrible chiefly because they

are soft--soft with a sentimentalism swathed in folds of piety. The

customs of Old Chester stifle its inhabitants, who take a kind of stolid

joy in their fetters; and Mrs. Deland, with all her understanding, does

not illuminate them. The movements of her imagination are cumbered by a

too narrow--however charming--cage. Her excellence belongs to the hours

when, not trying to transcend her little Pennsylvania universe, she

brings accuracy and shrewdness and felicity to the chronicles of small

beer in _Old Chester Tales_ and _Dr. Lavendar's People_. These

strictures and this praise she earns by her adherence to the parochial

cult of local color.

2. ROMANCE

If naturalism was a reaction from the small beer of local color, so, in

another fashion, was the flare-up of romance which attended and

succeeded the Spanish War. History was suddenly discovered to be

wonderful no less than humble life; and so was adventure in the

difficult quarters of the earth. That curious, that lush episode of

fiction endowed American literature with a phalanx of "best sellers"

some of which still continue to be sold, in diminished numbers; and it

endowed the national tradition with a host of gallant personages and

heroic incidents dug up out of old books or brought back from far quests

by land or water. It remains, however, an episode; the rococo romancers

did not last. Almost without exception they turned to other methods as

the romantic mood faded out of the populace. Of those who had employed

history for their substance only James Branch Cabell remained absolutely

faithful, revising, strengthening, deepening his art with irony and

beauty until it became an art exquisitely peculiar to himself.

Mary Johnston was as faithful, but her fidelity had less growth in it.

Originally attracted to the heroic legend of colonial Virginia, she has

since so far departed from it as to produce in the _Long Roll_ and

_Cease Firing_ a wide panorama of the Civil War, in other books to study

the historic plight and current unrest of women, and here and there to

show an observant consciousness of the changing world; but her

imagination long ago sank its deepest roots into the traditions of the

Old Dominion. She brings to them, however, no fresh interpretations, as

satisfied as any medieval romancer to ring harmonious changes on ancient

themes, enlarging them, perhaps, with something spacious in her language

and liberal in her sentiments, yet transmitting her material rather as a

singer than as a poet, agreeably rather than creatively.

As Miss Johnston leans upon history for her favorite staff, so James

Lane Allen leans upon "Nature." He is not, indeed, innocent of history.

His Kentucky is always conscious of its chivalric past, and his most

popular romance, _The Choir Invisible_, has its scene laid in and near

the Lexington of the eighteenth century. Nor is he innocent of the

devices of local color. His earliest collection of tales--_Flute and

Violin_--and his ingratiating comment upon it--_The Blue-Grass Region of

Kentucky_--once for all established the character which his chosen

district has in the world of the imagination. But from the first he held

principles of art which would not allow him to consider either history

or local color as ends in themselves. He believed they must be

employed, when employed, as elements contributory to some general effect

of beauty or of meaning. He has built up beauty with the most deliberate

hands, and he has sought to express the highest meanings in his art,

seeking to look through the "thin-aired regions of consciousness which

are ruled over by Tact to the underworld of consciousness where are

situated the mighty workshops, and where toils on forever the cyclopean

youth, Instinct."

In this important program, however, he has constantly been handicapped

by his orthodoxies. John Gray, in _The Choir Invisible_, loving a woman

who though in love with him is bound in marriage to another, engages

himself to a young girl, shortly afterward to find that his real love is

free again; yet with a high gesture of sacrifice he holds to his

engagement and enters upon a union of duty which is sure to make two,

and possibly three, persons unhappy instead of one, though all of them

are equally guiltless. Mr. Allen approves of this immoral arithmetic

with a sentimentalism which has drawn rains of tears down thoughtless

cheeks. So in _The Reign of Law_ he exhibits a youth extricating himself

from an obsolete theology with sufferings which can be explained only on

the ground that the theology was too strong ever to have been escaped or

the youth too weak ever to have rebelled. And in _Aftermath_, sequel to

_A Kentucky Cardinal_, the author sentimentally and quite needlessly

stacks the cards against his hero and lets his heroine die, to bring, as

he might say, "the eternal note of sadness in." All this to show how

"Nature" holds men in her powerful hands and tortures them when they

struggle to follow the mind to liberty! To prove a thesis so profoundly

true and tragic Mr. Allen can do no more than borrow the tricks of

melodrama.

Just how melodramatic his sentimentalism forces him to be has often been

overlooked because of his diction and his pictures. Though he tends to

the mellifluous and the saccharine he has in his better pages a dewy,

luminous style, with words choicely picked out and cadences delicately

manipulated. By comparison most of the local colorists of his period

seem homespun and most of the romancers a little tawdry. His method is

the mosaicist's, working self-consciously in fine materials. Movement

with him never leaps nor flows; in fact, it seems to dawdle when, too

often, he forgets to be vigilant in the interests of simplicity; it is

languid with scrupulous hesitations and accumulations. As to his

pictures, they come from a Kentucky glorified. When he says that in June

there "the warm-eyed, bronzed, foot-stamping young bucks forsake their

plowshares in the green rows, their reapers among the yellow beards; and

the bouncing, laughing, round-breasted girls arrange their ribbons and

their vows," Mr. Allen is remembering Theocritus, the _Pervigilium

Veneris_, and the silver ages of literature no less than his own state

and his own day. He uses local color habitually to ennoble it, and but

for his extravagant taste for sweetness he might have achieved pastorals

of an imperishable sort.

Even as it is, the _Kentucky Cardinal-Aftermath_ story has all the

quaint grace of pressed flowers and remembered valentines, and _Summer

in Arcady_, his masterpiece, has at once rich passion and spare form.

Here Mr. Allen is at his best, representing young love springing up

fiercely, exuberantly, against a lovely background congenial to the

human mood. He has not known, however, how to keep up that difficult

equilibrium between artifice and simplicity which the idyl demands. His

later books tend to be turgid, oppressive, cloying with sentimentalism

and amorous obsessions in their graver moments, and in their lighter

moments to fall flat from a lack of the true sinews of comedy.

Of a temper as different as possible from Mr. Allen's was Edgar Saltus,

just dead, who stood alone and decadent in a country which the _fin de

siècle_ scarcely touched with its graceful, graceless maladies. He began

his career, after a penetrating study of Balzac, with _The Philosophy of

Disenchantment_ and _The Anatomy of Negation_, erudite, witty challenges

to illusion, deriving primarily from Hartmann and Schopenhauer but

enriching their arguments with much inquisitive learning in current

French philosophers and poets. Erudition, however, was not Saltus's sole

equipment: his pessimism came, in part, from his literary masters but in

part also from a temperament which steadily followed its own impulses

and arrived at its own destinations. Cynical, deracinated, he turned

from his speculative doubts to the positive realities of sense,

becoming the historian of love and loveliness in sumptuous, perverse

phases. In _Mary Magdalen_ he dressed up a traditional courtesan in the

splendors of purple and gold and perfumed her with many quaint,

dangerous essences more exciting than her later career as penitent; in

_Imperial Purple_ he undertook a chronicle of the Roman emperors from

Julius Caesar to Heliogabolus, exhibiting them in the most splendid of

all their extravagances and sins; in _Historia Amoris_ he followed the

maddening trail of love and in _The Lords of the Ghostland_ the

saddening trail of faith through the annals of mankind.

He wrote novels, too, of contemporary life, but they are his least

notable achievements. His personages in none of these novels manage to

convince; his plots are melodrama; his worldly wisdom has smirks and

postures in it; his style, now sharp now sagging, is unequal. Saltus

could not, it seems, dispense with antiquity and remoteness in his

books. Only when buried in the deep world of ancient story or when

ranging through the widest field of time did he become most himself.

Then he invited no comparisons with familiar actualities and could

assemble the most magnificent glories according to his whims and could

drape them in the most gorgeous stuffs. What especially touched his

imagination was the spectacle of imperial Rome as interpreted to him by

French decadence: that lust for power and sensation, those incredible

temples, palaces, feasts, revelries, blasphemies, butcheries. Commencing

with a beauty which knew no bounds, he moved on to lust or satiety or

impotence for his theme; in the end he brought little but a glittering

ferocity to that cold chronicle of the czars from Ivan to Catherine,

_The Imperial Orgy_. His phrases never failed him, flashing like gems or

snakes and clasping his exuberant materials in almost the only

discipline they ever had. Wit withheld him from utter lusciousness.

Though he employed Corinthian cadences and diction, he kept continually

checking them with the cynic twist of some deft colloquialism. To

venture into his microcosm is to bid farewell to all that is simple and

kindly; it is, however, to discover the terrible beauty that lurks

behind corruption, malevolent though delirious.

Romance of the traditionary sort, it is plain, has lately lost its vogue

in the United States and is being neglected as at almost no other period

since Fenimore Cooper established its principal native modes. The

ancient romantic matters of the Settlement and the Revolution flourish

almost solely in tales for boys. There is of course still a matter of

the Frontier, but it is another frontier: the Canadian North and

Northwest, Alaska, the islands of the South Seas, latterly the battle

fields of France, and always the trails of American exploration wherever

they may chance to lead. The performers upon such themes--the Rex

Beaches, the Emerson Houghs, the Randall Parrishes, the Zane Greys, the

James Oliver Curwoods--march ordinarily under the noisy banner of "red

blood" and derive from Stephen Crane, Frank Norris, Jack London, those

generous boys of naturalism whose temperaments carried them again and

again into the territories of vivid danger. Criticism notes in the later

annalists of "red blood" their spasmodic energy, their considerable

technical knowledge, their stereotyped characters, their recurrent

formulas, their uncritical, Rooseveltian opinions, their enormous

popularity, their almost complete lack of distinction in style or

attitude, and passes by without further obligation than to point out

that Stewart Edward White probably deserves to stand first among them by

virtue of a certain substantial range and panoramic faithfulness to the

life of the lumbermen represented in his most successful book, _The

Blazed Trail_.

This phase of life deserves particular emphasis for the reason that

there has recently been growing up among the lumber-camps from the Bay

of Fundy to Puget Sound the legend of a mythical hero named Paul Bunyan

who is the only personage of the sort yet invented and elaborated by the

ordinary run of men in any American calling. Paul is less a patron saint

of the loggers than an autochthonous Munchausen, whose fame has been

extended almost entirely by word of mouth among lumbermen resting from

their work and vying with one another to see who could tell the most

stupendous yarn about Paul's prowess and achievements. The process

resembles that which in the folk everywhere has evolved enormous legends

about favorite heroes; the legend concerning Paul, however, is

essentially native in its accurate geography, in its passion for

grotesque exaggeration, in its hilarious metaphors, in its dry,

drawling, straight-faced narrative method. Exaggeration such as that in

some of these stories verges upon genius. When Paul goes West he

carelessly lets his pick drag behind him and cuts out the Grand Canyon

of the Colorado; he raises corn in Kansas prodigious enough to suck the

Mississippi dry and stop navigation; he builds a hotel so high that he

has "the last seven stories put on hinges so's they could be swung back

for to let the moon go by"; he achieves such feats of eating and

drinking and working and fighting and loving as make Hercules himself

seem a pallid fellow who should have gone upon the rowdy American

frontier to learn the great ways of adventure. Though it is true that

the legend has been developing for many years without adequate literary

use of it having yet been made, it lies ready for romance to handle; and

no discussion of contemporary American fiction can go deeper than the

surfaces without at least mentioning that hilarious chapbook _Paul

Bunyan Comes West_.

That romance is just now being slighted appears from the lamentable

hiatus into which the fame of Charles D. Stewart has lately fallen. His

_Partners of Providence_ suffers from the inevitable comparison with

_Tom Sawyer_ and _Huckleberry Finn_ which it cannot stand, though it

continues the saga of the Mississippi with sympathy and knowledge; but

_The Fugitive Blacksmith_ has a flavor which few comparisons and no

neglect can spoil. Its protagonist, wrongly accused of a murder which he

by mischance finds it difficult to explain, takes to his heels and

lives by his mechanic wits among the villages of the lower Mississippi

through a diversity of adventures which puts his story among the little

masterpieces of the picaresque. Though it is clumsily garnished with

irrelevant things, it stands out above them, racy, rememberable. The

blacksmith has an ingenuity as varied as his experiences. Whereas other

picaroes cheat or fight or love their ways, this hero uses his dexterity

at unaccustomed trades until it is little less than intoxicating to see

him rise to each emergency. He is a proletarian Odysseus, and his

history is a quaint _Odyssey_ of the roving artisan.

The matter of the Civil War, though very large in the American memory,

has in literature not quite reached a parity with the older matters of

the Settlement, the Revolution, and the Frontier, principally, no doubt,

because there has been only one period--and that a brief one--of

historical romance since the war. In connection with this matter,

however, there has been created the legend which at present is surely

the most potent of all the legendary elements dear to the American

imagination.

Abraham Lincoln is, strictly speaking, more than a legend; he has become

a cult. Immediately after his death he lived in the national mind for a

time as primarily a martyr; then emphasis shifted to his humor and a

whole literature of waggish tales and retorts and apologues assembled

around his name; then he passed into a more sentimental zone and endless

stories were multiplied about his natural piety and his habit of

pardoning innocent offenders. Out of the efflorescence of all these

aspects of legend which accompanied the centenary of his birth there has

since seemed to be emerging--though the older aspects still persist as

well--a conception of him as a figure at once lofty and familiar, at

once sad and witty, at once Olympian and human. Among poets of all

grades of opinion Lincoln is the chief native hero: Edwin Arlington

Robinson has best expressed in words as firm as bronze the Master's

reputation for lonely pride and forgiving laughter; John Gould Fletcher,

with an eloquence found nowhere else in his work, likens Lincoln to a

tree so mighty that its branches reach the heavens and its roots the

primal rock and nations of men may rest in its shade; Edgar Lee Masters,

whose work is full of the shadow and light of Lincoln, has made his most

moving lyric an epitaph upon Ann Rutledge, the girl Lincoln loved and

lost; and Vachel Lindsay, in Lincoln's own Springfield, during the World

War thought of him as so stirred even in death by the horrors which then

alarmed the universe that he could not sleep but walked up and down the

midnight streets, mourning and brooding. It is precisely thus, in other

ages, that saints are said to appear at difficult moments, to quiet the

waves or turn the arrow aside. Without these more vulgar manifestations

Lincoln nevertheless lives as the founder of every cult lives, in the

echoes of his voice on many tongues and in the vibrations of his voice

in many affections.

The novelists, unfortunately, fall behind the poets in the beauty and

wisdom with which they celebrate the figure of Lincoln, though they have

produced scores of volumes associated with it, upon the life not only of

Lincoln himself but of his mother, of his children, of this or that

friend or neighbor. Of the various novels--from Winston Churchill's _The

Crisis_ to Irving Bacheller's _A Man for the Ages_--which have sought to

mingle the right proportions of rural shrewdness and honorable dignity,

no one has yet been equal to the magnitude of its theme. They have

followed the customary paths of the historical romance without seeming

to realize that in a theme so spacious they could learn from the methods

of Plato with Socrates, of Shakespeare with his kingly heroes, of the

biographers of Francis of Assisi with their gracious saint.

Few literary tasks are harder than the task of the critic holding a

steady course through the welter of novels which make a tumult in the

world and trying to indicate those which have some genuine significance

as works of art or intelligence or as documents upon the time. How shall

he dispose, for example, of such beguilers of the millions as Gene

Stratton Porter, who piles sentimentalism upon "Nature" till the soft

heap defies analysis, and Harold Bell Wright, who cannily mixes

sentimentalism with valor and prudence till the resultant blend tempts

appetites uncounted? Popularity has its arts no less than excellence;

and so has it its own kind of seriousness. Much as the advertiser and

the salesman have done to market tons of Mrs. Porter and Mr. Wright,

they could not have done it without the assistance furnished them by the

fact that their authors believe and feel the things they write. They

throb with all the popular impulses; they laugh when the multitude

laughs and weep when it weeps; and they have the gift--which is really

rare not common--of calling the multitude's attention to their books in

which is displayed, as in a consoling mirror, the sweet, rosy, empty

features of banality.

How shall the patient critic dispose of Robert W. Chambers, who,

possessing in a high degree the qualities of narrative, of costume, of

dramatic effectiveness, of satire even (as witness _Iole_), has drifted

with the fashions for a generation and has latterly allowed himself to

decline to the manufacture of literary sillibub in the guise of novels

about the smart set and Bohemia? How shall the stern critic dispose of

Gertrude Atherton, who knows so much about California, New York, and the

international scene but who somehow fails to transmute her materials to

any lasting metal and leaves the impression of a vexed aristocrat

scolding the age without either convincing it or convicting it of very

serious deficiencies? How shall the accurate critic dispose of Frank

Harris, who was born in Ireland and who had the most conspicuous part of

his career in England, but who is a naturalized American citizen and who

has written in _The Bomb_ a vivid and intelligent novel dealing with the

Chicago "anarchists" of 1886? How shall the conscientious critic dispose

of the Owen Johnsons and the Rupert Hugheses and the Gouverneur

Morrises and the George Barr McCutcheons with all their energy and

information and good intentions and yet with their fatal lack of true

distinction?

How shall the tolerant critic dispose of the writers of detective

stories whose name is legion and whose art is to fine fiction as

arithmetic to calculus--particularly Arthur Reeve, inventor of that

Craig Kennedy who with endless ingenuity solves problem after problem by

the introduction of scientific and pseudoscientific novelties? How shall

the puzzled critic dispose of Alice Duer Miller and her light, bright

stories of fashionable life; of Edward Lucas White and his vast

panoramas of South America and the ancient world; of Katherine Fullerton

Gerould, with her grim tales and her petulant conservatism; of those

energetic successors of O. Henry, Edna Ferber and Fanny Hurst; of the

late Charles Emmet Van Loan, with his intimate knowledge of sport; of

the schools and swarms of men and women who write short stories for the

most part but who occasionally essay a novel? How shall the worried

critic dispose of the more or less professional humorists who have

created characters and localities: Irvin S. Cobb, who, capable of better

things, prefers the paths of the grotesque and rolls his bulk through

current literature laughing at his own misadventures; Finley Peter

Dunne, inventor of that Mr. Dooley who makes it clear that the American

tradition which invented Poor Richard is still alive; Ring W. Lardner,

master of the racy vernacular of the almost illiterate; George Ade,

easily first of his class, fabulist and satirist?

Perhaps it is best for the baffled critic to leave all of them to time

and, singling out the ten living novelists who seem to him most

distinguished or significant, to study them one by one, adding some

account of the school of fiction just now predominant.

Contemporary American Novelists (1900-1920) · 第 1 / 4 章